Novel mucosal adjuvants and delivery systems

ABSTRACT

Adjuvants comprising chitosan cross-linked with an aldehyde or mannosylated chitosan are provided herein. Methods of making the adjuvants and methods of combining or linking the adjuvants with antigens are also provided. The adjuvant-antigen combinations can be used in vaccine formulations and the vaccine formulations can be used in methods to vaccinate animals against the source of the antigen or to enhance the immune response in a subject.

CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS

This patent application claims the benefit of priority of U.S.Provisional Patent Application No. 61/719,713, filed Oct. 29, 2012,which is incorporated herein by reference in its entirety.

INTRODUCTION

An adjuvant is a pharmacological or immunological agent that modifiesthe effect of other agents, such as a drug or vaccine. Adjuvants areoften included in vaccines to enhance the recipient's immune response toa supplied antigen, while keeping the injected foreign material to aminimum.

Adjuvants do not in themselves confer immunity. Adjuvants can act invarious ways in presenting an antigen to the immune system. Adjuvantscan act as a depot for the antigen, presenting the antigen over a longperiod of time, thus maximizing the immune response before the bodyclears the antigen. Examples of depot type adjuvants are oil emulsions,like Freund's adjuvant. Adjuvants can also act as an irritant whichcauses the body to recruit and amplify its immune response. The tetanus,diphtheria, and pertussis vaccine, for example, contains minutequantities of toxins produced by each of the target bacteria, but alsocontains aluminum hydroxide. Aluminum salts are common adjuvants invaccines sold in the United States and have been used in vaccines forover 70 years.

Chitosan is a linear polysaccharide composed of randomly distributedβ-(I-4)-linked D-glucosamine (deacetylated unit) andN-acetyl-D-glucosamine (acetylated unit). It is made by treating shrimpand other crustacean shells with the alkali sodium hydroxide. Chitosanhas been used as a carrier for both oral and subcutaneous vaccines withsome success. Here we present novel chitosan-based adjuvant formulationswhich are shown to perform better as adjuvants than the traditionallyused Alum adjuvants. In particular, the chitosan-based adjuvantsprovided herein were effective at stimulating an IgA response.

SUMMARY

Provided herein are adjuvants, vaccine formulations comprising theadjuvants, methods of making the adjuvants and methods of using theadjuvants and vaccine formulations. In particular, chitosan and anantigen may be cross-linked using an aldehyde. In one aspect, acomposition comprising 0.5% to 2% of an aldehyde cross-linked chitosanand an antigen is provided. The final concentration of aldehyde in avaccine composition is less than 0.5%.

In another aspect, an adjuvant composition comprising a carbohydratelinked to chitosan to form a Schiff base is provided. The adjuvant maybe combined with an antigen. The carbohydrate may be mannose.

In yet another aspect, vaccine formulations are provided. Vaccineformulations may include the adjuvants provided herein and an antigen.The antigens may be proteins or microbial in nature, suitable microbesinclude bacteria, yeast, or other fungi, eukaryotic parasites andviruses and may be attenuated, recombinant, killed or otherwiseinactivated.

In still another aspect, methods of making the adjuvants and vaccinecompositions are provided herein. The chitosan is dissolved in asolution of acetic acid, and an antigen is added to the dissolvedchitosan. Finally the antigen and chitosan are combined with an aldehydesuch that the final concentration of the aldehyde is between 0.02% and0.5%. Tris may be added to the adjuvant to quench free aldehydes andresult in a more stable adjuvant.

In a still further aspect, methods of enhancing the immune response of asubject to an antigen are also provided. The methods includeadministering a vaccine formulation comprising an antigen and achitosan-based adjuvant disclosed herein to the subject. Thechitosan-based adjuvant may be an aldehyde cross-linked chitosan or acarbohydrate-linked chitosan.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

FIG. 1 is a graph showing the anti-β-galactosidase IgG antibody responsein turkeys following primary vaccination and boost with the indicatedvaccine-adjuvant formulations. Different letters indicate significantdifferences (p≦0.05).

FIG. 2 is a graph showing the Clostridium septicum IgG antibody responsein turkeys following primary vaccination and boost with the indicatedvaccine-adjuvant formulations. Different letters indicate significantdifferences (p≦0.05).

FIG. 3 is a set of graphs showing the IgG (FIG. 3A) and IgA (FIG. 3B)antibody response in chickens at various time points after vaccinationand boost with the indicated Bacillus-vectored avian influenzavaccine-adjuvant formulations.

FIG. 4 is a graph showing the IgG antibody levels against Salmonellafollowing primary vaccination and boost with the indicatedvaccine-adjuvant formulations measured using a competitive ELISA.Different letters indicate significant differences (p≦0.05).

FIG. 5 is a graph showing the IgA antibody levels against Salmonellafollowing primary vaccination and boost with the indicatedvaccine-adjuvant formulations measured using a competitive ELISA.Different letters indicate significant differences (p≦0.05).

FIG. 6 is a set of graphs showing the IgG (FIG. 6A) and IgA (FIG. 6B)antibody levels against Salmonella following primary vaccination andboost with the indicated vaccine-adjuvant formulations measured using acompetitive EISA. Different letters indicate significant differences(p≦0.05).

FIG. 7 is a graph showing the percent recovery of Salmonella in theliver and spleen (L/S) or cecal tonsils (CT) on day 22 after primaryvaccination (day 3 after challenge). The vaccination protocol was thesame as that used in FIG. 6 and a * indicates P<0.05.

FIG. 8 is a graph showing the IgA antibody level against Salmonella atDay 22 following primary vaccination and boost (Day 12) with theindicated vaccine-adjuvant formulations via the indicated routes ofadministration as measured using a competitive ELISA. Different lettersindicate significant differences (p≦0.5).

FIG. 9 is a graph showing the IgG immune response to Salmonella aftervaccination of chicks with the indicated vaccine-adjuvant formulationsas measured by a competitive ELISA. Different letters indicatesignificant differences (p≦0.05).

FIG. 10 is a graph showing the IgA immune response to Salmonella aftervaccination of chicks with the indicated vaccine-adjuvant formulationsas measured by competitive ELISA.

Different letters indicate significant differences (p≦0.05).

FIG. 11 is a graph showing the IgG immune response to Bordetella aviumafter a single parenteral vaccination of turkeys with the indicatedvaccine-adjuvant formulations. Different letters indicate significantdifferences (p≦0.05). FIG. 12 is a graph showing the IgG immune responseto Bordetella avium after subcutaneous vaccination with the indicatedvaccine-adjuvant formulation of day-of-hatch turkeys followed by adrinking water administration of the same vaccine-adjuvant combinationon day 14. The response was measured at day 21. Different lettersindicate significant differences (p≦0.05).

DETAILED DESCRIPTION

Provided herein are adjuvants which include chitosan, vaccineformulations comprising the adjuvants, methods of making the adjuvantsand methods of using the adjuvants and vaccine formulations. In summary,a novel adjuvant system that can be used in similar methods to otheradjuvants such as those used for parenteral (injection) is describedherein. The base molecule involves chitosan, which is a deacetylatedform of chitin, the exoskeleton of many invertebrate animals (shrimp,crabs, insects, etc.). Chitosan is considered a generally recognized assafe (GRAS) compound and is used for weight loss, cholesterol reduction,insomnia, and kidney function improvement. Chitosan is also used as anadjuvant used with various mucosal vaccines (Jabbal-Gill et al., 2012),but the chitosans described herein are new and function better thantraditional chitosan as shown in the Examples.

Chitosan-protein cross-linked with formaldehyde and carbohydrate-linkedchitosan provide a unique adjuvant for oral or parenteral delivery ofvaccine antigens. Chitosan has been used as a carrier for both oral andsubcutaneous vaccines. In some of the formulations, the antigen iscovalently bound to the chitosan by treatment with formaldehyde. Inothers, the adjuvant system is improved by addition of a carbohydrate(mannose, fucose, and galactose) linked to the chitosan, allowingtargeting of the mannose receptors on the antigen presenting cells, thusenhancing the immune response to the chitosan-antigen complex. Both thechitosan-protein cross-linked with formaldehyde and themannosylated-chitosan protein complex, give a robust immune response byboth parenteral and oral (or other mucosal) delivery routes, which isunique for inactivated vaccines.

In one aspect, an adjuvant composition comprising a carbohydrate linkedto chitosan to form a Schiff base is provided. The adjuvant may becombined with an antigen. The carbohydrate may be mannose, mannobiose,glucose, galactose or fructose. Other suitable carbohydrates may beused. Without being limited by theory, the carbohydrate is added to thechitosan for the purpose of targeting the chitosan to receptors forthese carbohydrates on the surface of antigen presenting cells.

The carbohydrate-chitosan used herein is made as described more fully inthe Examples below. Our method is based on Jayasree (Jayasree et al.,2011) using an open ring carbohydrate with an available carbonyl groupthat reacts with the amino group on chitosan to form a Schiff-base. ThisSchiff-base can be stabilized by reduction with sodium cyanoborohydride(NaCNBH₄). We have shown that the reduction was not necessary forimmunopotentiation in FIG. 6 in which the reduced (Man-C V1) wascompared to the non-reduced form (Man-C V2) of the chitosan. Thenon-reduced form produced the best IgA response, thus either form can beused. In addition, the non-reduced form of the mannosylated chitosandoes not require the addition of a toxic chemical (NaCNBH₄). Briefly,the carbohydrate, suitably mannose (10 μM), is dissolved in 0.1M sodiumacetate pH 4.0 at 60° C. for 2 hours and chitosan (0.2-2%) is dissolvedin 1.5% acetic acid. The dissolved mannose and the dissolved chitosanare then combined and incubated at room temperature to allow the aminegroup on the chitosan to react with the carbonyl on the sugar to producea Schiff base. Reduction of the Schiff base is not necessary for theadjuvant to function and indeed the Examples show the non-reduced Schiffbase is a better adjuvant (see FIG. 6). In other embodiments, the Schiffbase may be reduced.

In another embodiment, chitosan and an antigen may be cross-linked usingan aldehyde. In one aspect, a composition comprising 0.5% to 2% of analdehyde cross-linked chitosan and an antigen. The final vaccineformulation suitably contains 0.5 to 1.5% chitosan. The adjuvant maycontain 0.5% to 3% chitosan, suitably 0.5% to 2% chitosan, suitably 0.5%to 1.5% chitosan, suitably 0.5% to 1.2% chitosan. The finalconcentration of aldehyde in a vaccine composition is suitably less than0.5%, The maximum concentration of aldehyde is based on the maximumlevel of residual aldehyde allowed in vaccines. A higher level of analdehyde may be used for cross-linking the chitosan, but the finalvaccine formulation suitably contains less than 0.5% aldehyde. In theExamples, formaldehyde was used as the aldehyde to cross-link thechitosan. Other aldehydes, such as formalin, glutaraldehyde,acetaldehyde, propionaldehyde, or butyraldehyde, may also be used. Thealdehydes cross-link the chitosan amino groups with those on otherchitosan molecules or on the antigens.

Methods of making a vaccine formulation comprising an aldehydecross-linked chitosan and an antigen is also provided herein. Themethods include dissolving chitosan in a solution of acetic acid. Thecarbohydrate-linked chitosan may also be used as the chitosan in thismethod. Suitably the acetic acid is used at 1.5% final concentration inwater or 15 mL of acetic acid dissolved in 1 L of water. Suitably theamount of chitosan is between 0.5% and 2%, suitably between 0.5% and1.5%. An antigen is added to the dissolved chitosan at the appropriatelevel. The amount and form of the antigens used in the vaccineformulations can be determined by those of skill in the art. Finally,the antigen and chitosan are combined with the aldehyde such that thefinal concentration of the aldehyde is between 0.02% and 0.5%. Thealdehyde is capable of chemically cross-linking the chitosan to otherchitosan molecules and the chitosan to the antigen. Tris-HCl can beadded to quench free aldehydes. The Tris can be added to a finalconcentration of 0.5 g/L.

Either adjuvant composition disclosed herein may be combined withenhancing molecules including but not limited to saponin, toll-likereceptors, the B subunit of a bacterial toxin, bacterial toxins, tetanustoxoid, CpG motifs, liposomes or monophosphoryl A. Suitably theenhancing molecules act as further stimulators of the immune system andenhance the immune response generated after administration of thevaccine formulation to a subject.

The vaccine formulations provided herein comprise the chitosan-basedadjuvants described herein and antigens. The antigens may be anyantigens available to those of skill in the art. Antigens such asproteins, synthetic peptides, peptides conjugated to carriers, ormicrobes may be used in the vaccines. Microbes include bacteria, yeast,parasites, fungi, viruses, helminthes or other disease causingorganisms. Microbes include live, dead, attenuated, recombinant, orinactivated organisms. Examples of microbes include, but are not limitedto Salmonella, Escherichia, Shigella, Bordetella, Clostridium,Mycoplasma, Staphylococcus, Streptococcus, Bacillus, Influenza, andEimeria. Microbes may be inactivated or killed prior to use by treatmentwith heat, methanol or other fixatives such as formaldehyde or otheraldehydes. The aldehydes can be quenched by subsequent addition ofTris-HCl to a final concentration of 0.5 g/L. Suitable antigens may alsoinclude peptide antigens such as Influenza M2e, Hemaglutinin,Neuraminidase, or nuclear proteins; Eimeria TRAP or MPP; Clostridiumsialidase, SagA, alpha-toxin, NetB toxin, or iron transport protein.Examples of other peptide antigens can be found at least in U.S.application Ser. Nos. 12/441,851; 12/740,631; 12/740,608; 13/574,504;and 13/702,827, all of which are incorporated herein by reference intheir entireties. The chitosan based adjuvants may be used to increasethe immune response to vaccines already available or to newly developedvaccines or autogenous vaccines.

There are two significant improvements to vaccination associated withthis work. First, when modified chitosan is co-administered withinactive vaccine by the parenteral route, we see an immune response thatis superior to the immune response observed with other adjuvants, suchas alum, with a minimal injection-site reaction. Many adjuvants work bycausing an inflammatory response at the site of injection or delayingabsorption from the injection site, or both. One of the down sides totraditional adjuvants is that they often cause some reaction, soreness,and in some cases they cause persistent lesions that cause downgradingor trimming of meant-producing animals at slaughter. The modifiedchitosan may reduce these concerns associated other vaccine adjuvants.It is cheap to produce and easy to make into commercial vaccines.

In addition, robust immune responses are being generated when killedantigens are co-presented orally either by gavage or by inclusion in thedrinking water. This is really important for domestic animals—especiallyfor poultry, because handling for parenteral injection is very laborintensive and causes stress to the birds or other animals. With theexception of the hatchery, it is generally too expensive to useinactivated vaccines in poultry because of the administration cost. Theability to deliver the vaccine orally changes the way we are able tovaccinate animals. There are two main advantages of live (calledmodified live or attenuated vaccines) for mass administration. First,you can mass apply by drinking water or spray application. Second, theselive vaccines also generate immunity in the local mucosa (respiratorytract and intestinal tract where most pathogens infect). As such, eitherkilled or live vaccines can protect from disease, but the live vaccinesare historically more effective at preventing actual infection, andtherefore are preferred.

There are huge advantages to killed vaccines in that they can beproduced quickly with very low risk of causing infection and disease,they cannot genetically change back into the disease-causing parenttype, and they have much lower regulatory issues for these reasons.Also, there are a large and ever-growing number of orphan diseases whichare not sufficiently common for a vaccine company to develop aregulated/licensed vaccine, and there are provisions in US law (and manyother countries) for producing “autogenous” vaccines specifically madefrom the pathogen of interest, killed, and used on the source flocks (oranimal or human populations). In developing countries orphan diseasesoccur that require vaccines that are not affordable or that aretechnically not possible to produce locally or quickly enough to dealwith an outbreak. The adjuvants provided herein are affordable andtechnologically straightforward to produce. They can be readily combinedwith a killed or inactivated microbe to generate a vaccine.

Several potential applications for the technology described herein areavailable. The systemic response to killed vaccines can be improved byincorporation of the altered chitosan as an adjuvant for injection. Wecan prevent some diseases through oral administration of killed vaccineswith this adjuvant platform. This adjuvant platform, when administeredorally, may be targeted to stimulate systemic and/or mucosalresponses—meaning that it has many of the advantages of live vaccines,but avoiding the issues of live vaccines described above.

The adjuvants and vaccine formulations described herein may be combinedwith other pharmaceutically acceptable carriers. A pharmaceuticallyacceptable carrier is any carrier suitable for in vivo administration.Examples of pharmaceutically acceptable carriers suitable for use in thecompositions include, but are not limited to, water, buffered solutions,glucose solutions, oil-based or bacterial culture fluids. Additionalcomponents of the compositions may suitably include, for example,excipients such as stabilizers, preservatives, diluents, emulsifiers andlubricants. Examples of pharmaceutically acceptable carriers or diluentsinclude stabilizers such as carbohydrates (e.g., sorbitol, mannitol,starch, sucrose, glucose, dextran), proteins such as albumin or casein,protein-containing agents such as bovine serum or skimmed milk andbuffers (e.g., phosphate buffer). Especially when such stabilizers areadded to the compositions, the composition is suitable for freeze-dryingor spray-drying. The composition may also be emulsified.

The compositions described herein may also be combined with otherpharmaceutical compositions and these compositions may be administeredin any order, at the same time or as part of a unitary composition. Thetwo compositions may be administered such that one is administeredbefore the other with a difference in administration time of 1 hour, 2hours, 4 hours, 8 hours, 12 hours, 16 hours, 20 hours, 1 day, 2 days, 4days, 7 days, 2 weeks, 4 weeks or more.

An effective amount or a therapeutically effective amount of the vaccineformulations as used herein means the amount of the composition that,when administered to a subject for enhancing the immune response of thesubject to the targeted disease is capable of increasing the immuneresponse, such as the cell-mediated or antibody mediated immune responseto limit the morbidity or mortality associated with infection orexposure to the targeted disease. Suitably, the immune response isenhanced to a level such that administration is sufficient to effect atreatment or block disease related morbidity or mortality. Thetherapeutically effective amount will vary depending on the vaccine,formulation or composition, the disease and its severity and the age,weight, physical condition and responsiveness of the subject. Forexample the level of antibody produced in response to vaccination may beincreased by two fold, three fold, four fold or more by inclusion of theadjuvant described herein as compared to administration of the sameantigen without an adjuvant or with alum as an adjuvant. The increasedimmune response may be an IgA response, or an IgG response. The adjuvantmay also lead to a reduction in the morbidity or mortality associatedwith subsequent infection. As shown in the Examples, use of theadjuvants described herein in combination with an antigen may lead to areduction in the rate of subsequent infection or the severity ofsubsequent infection with the microbe to which the antigen elicits animmune response as compared to vaccination with the antigen alone orvaccination with the antigen and a distinct adjuvant. The severity ofthe infection may be measured by the ability of a microorganism toinvade tissues beyond the site of introduction, replicate and/or persistwithin the organism over time, or cause morbidity or mortality. Thevaccinated animals may be subsequently infected with a pathogen. In suchcases, the growth of the pathogen in the subject after challenge isreduced by at least 1 log₁₀, 2 log₁₀ or even 3 log₁₀ in subjectsadministered the vaccine as compared to subjects administered a control.

The compositions described herein may be administered by any means knownto those skilled in the art, including, but not limited to, oral,intranasal, intraperitoneal, parenteral, intravenous, intramuscular,subcutaneous, nasopharyngeal, or transmucosal absorption. Thus thecompounds may be formulated as an ingestable, sprayable or injectableformulation. For example, oral administration may entail addition to thedrinking water, spraying on food, spraying on the animals (such aschickens or turkeys that will ingest the vaccine in the spray when theypreen their feathers). The subjects may be mammals, including humans,cows, pigs, cats, dogs or other domesticated animals or non-mammals suchas poultry, i.e., chickens or turkeys.

It will be appreciated that the specific dosage administered and timingof administration (i.e. primary vaccination and boost) in any given casewill be adjusted in accordance with the formulation being administered,the disease being targeted, the risk of exposure, the condition of thesubject, and other relevant medical factors that may modify the responseof the subject or feasibility of providing the formulation to thesubject. For example, the specific dose for a subject depends on type ofsubject, age, body weight, general state of health, diet, the timing andmode of administration, the rate of excretion, medicaments used incombination and the severity of the particular disorder to which vaccineis targeted. The initial vaccination and the boost may be administeredby different means. For example, an initial vaccination via asubcutaneous route can be boosted by inclusion of the adjuvant-antigencomplex in the drinking water or food. The percentage of chitosan in thevaccine formulations is generally between 0.2 and 2%, suitably 0.5-1.5%.The total amount of chitosan administered may be from less than 1 mg pervaccination to 100 mg, suitably, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20,25, 50, 75 or 100 mg of chitosan. In the Examples, 2-5 mg chitosan wasused per dose. When combined with a microbial antigen, the microbe maybe included at between 1×10⁶ to 1×10⁹ microbes per dose. In theExamples, 1×10⁷ to 1×10⁸ microbes were used per dose. An antigen may beincluded at 10 μg to 10 mg per dose. In the Examples, 100 μg per dosewas used.

The following examples are meant only to be illustrative and are notmeant as limitations on the scope of the invention or of the appendedclaims. All references cited herein are hereby incorporated by referencein their entireties.

EXAMPLES Example I Immune Response to β-galactosidase Following PrimaryVaccination and Boost

Our first experiment to test the chitosan-protein cross-linked withformaldehyde vaccine used the classical protein β-galactosidase (β-Gal)as a model protein. Turkey poults were vaccinated with β-Gal, asdescribed in Table 1 below, with six treatment groups and one control.Poults were vaccinated with saline or β-Gal 100 μg (0.25 ml) in eithersaline, 15% alum, 1% chitosan cross-linked (3 groups) with formaldehyde(Form), or 1.5% chitosan not cross-linked with formaldehyde byparenteral subcutaneous (sq) injection at day-of-hatch. All groups wereboosted with the same formula sq at days 14 and 25 except two of the 1%chitosan groups, one boosted both days with 1% chitosan-β-Gal by oralgavage and one boosted by spray with 1% chiwstm-β-Gal (2 mL).

The immune response to the β-Galactosidase was determined using serum inan ELISA for β-galactosidase and the results are shown in FIG. 1. Levelsof the immune response are reported as sample to positive control ratiosof absorbance in an indirect ELISA. Higher S/P ratios indicate higheranti-β-galactosidase antibody titers. There was very littlecross-reactivity in the ELISA using serum from turkeys vaccinated withsaline and only a modest numerical increase when vaccinated with β-Galin saline. A common commercial adjuvant used currently is 15% alum andthere was a good immune response when this was used. Using ourchitosan-immunostimulated and formaldehyde cross-linked vaccine system(labeled as 1% chitosan) there was a significant increase in the immuneresponse to the model antigen, β-Gal. Using chitosan alone even at ahigher concentration of 1.5% there was a significantly lower immuneresponse. In addition, when the antigen was boosted with 1%chitosan-formaldehyde treated adjuvant by spray or oral treatment, therewas a response comparable to the standard adjuvant, 15% alum,administered subcutaneously.

TABLE 1 Treatment Groups Primary Day-of- hatch VX (100 μg/ Boost at 14days after Group Immunogen 0.25 ml) hatch Saline None SQ SQ (100 μg/0.5ml) βG in Saline β-Galactosidase SQ SQ (100 μg/0.5 ml) 15% Alumβ-Galactosidase SQ SQ (100 μg/0.5 ml) 1% Chitosan β-Galactosidase SQ SQ(100 μg/0.5 ml) 1.5% Chitosan β-Galactosidase SQ SQ no Form (100 μg/0.5ml) 1% Chitosan β-Galactosidase SQ Oral gavage 2^(nd) oral (100 μg/0.5ml) 1% chitosan β-Galactosidase SQ Spray (100 μg/ml) 2^(nd) Sprayatomized spray of 50 ml per 20 birds in a 20 sq. ft. room

Example II Immune Response to Clostridium Following Vaccination withVarious Adjuvants

A similar experiment to the one described above was carried out byadministering 4×10⁸ cfu/ml Clostridium septicum bacterin (CS) in eitheralum or formalin-cross-linked chitosan so that the final dose per birdis 1×10⁸ cfu/bird to day-of-hatch turkey poults subcutaneously (in 0.25mL) either alone or in combination with 12% alum or 0.5%formalin-cross-linked-chitosan. All birds were boosted at day 14 withthe same vaccine by the same route. Levels of the resulting immuneresponse were measured by an indirect ELISA assay and reported as sampleto positive control (S/P) ratio of absorbance. Higher S/P ratios areindicative of higher anti-CS antibodies.

Birds receiving vaccine without adjuvant resulted in an ELISA-detectableantibody response with an S/P ratio of 0.16 as shown in FIG. 2. Thisantibody level was not statistically different from that of the CSadjuvanted with alum. After one boost (14 days after primaryvaccination), poults vaccinated with the CS bacteria adjuvanted with0.5% formalin-cross-linked-chitosan showed IgG levels that resulted inS/P ratios approximately double that of the CS bacteria withoutadjuvant, 0.4 and 0.16 respectively. The CS bacteria with aluminumhydroxide adjuvant induced IgG levels that were approximately 30% lowerthan IgG levels induced by CS with chitosan compared by S/P ratios, 0.27and 0.4. respectively. (See FIG. 2). Importantly, injection site lesionsare less pronounced at 72 hours (or later) due to chitosanadministration whereas alum always produces local inflammation andgranulomas, often progressing to encapsulated scar tissue.

Example III Avian Influenza Vaccination Experiments

Avian influenza (AI) is a significant public health concern and seriouseconomic threat to the commercial poultry industry worldwide. Ourprevious data suggest that Salmonella-vectored vaccines expressing M2ein association with CD154 are effective against AI. New constructs usingBacillus subtilis as the vector and M2e epitopes with immunostimulatorymolecules were tested. M2e specific serum IgG and mucosal IgA antibodylevels were determined by ELISA on days 11, 15 and 21 post hatch. Onday-of-hatch chicks were vaccinated by either oral gavage orsubcutaneous injection with either Bacillus Wild Type (BSBB), Bacillusvectored avian influenza vaccine (BSAI) as a live vaccine, BSAI afterformalin inactivation. BSAI after formalin inactivation, lyophilizationand reconstitution with saline or BSAI after formalin inactivation andcross-linked with 1% chitosan. Each vaccine was administered at 10⁶cfu/chick in 0.25 ml or 0.25 ml saline. On day 10 post-hatch chicks intwo groups (BSAI live, BSAI inactivated and lyophilized) were given abooster vaccination of the same treatment they received at day 0 and allother groups did not receive the 2^(nd) vaccine dose.

Serum IgG and mucosal IgA samples were then obtained from birds in allgroups on days 11, 15 and 21 post hatch and used in an antibody captureELISA. Plates were coated with M2e conjugated to BSA (10 μg/ml),blocked, incubated with serum from each of the treatment groups diluted1:50 in 2% FBS/PRS, followed by incubation with a HRP-conjugatedsecondary antibody diluted 1:7,500, and developed using TMB substrate.The results are presented as mean S/P ratios (sample mean−negativecontrol mean)/(positive control mean−negative control mean)+SEM (n=20).

When compared with the Bacillus backbone control (BSBB), there weresignificant increases in M2e specific IgG antibody responses in eachvaccinated group at each time point tested. However, there were nodifferences observed within each time point between any of the sixvaccinated groups in increased IgG antibody response (See FIG. 3A). Thereal difference in immune response is apparent when looking at themucosal IgA specific antibody response (See FIG. 3B). BSAI+1% chitosanshowed a marked increase in specific IgA antibody response when comparedto control or the additional five treatment groups receiving vaccinationat all three time points sampled.

To summarize, in experiments using cross-linked chitosan we havedemonstrated above that this modification of chitosan is a betteradjuvant than aluminum hydroxide through both parenteral and oral routes(FIGS. 1 and 2). Chitosan treated with formaldehyde as a cross-linkerwas shown to be more effective than chitosan without formaldehyde (FIG.1). When used orally, chitosan enhanced the production of IgA (FIG. 3B)preferentially over IgG (FIG. 3A).

Example IV Enhancement of Chitosan Adjuvant

The adjuvant was further enhanced through a series of experimentsdesigned to improve the chitosan-based adjuvant by addition of potentialenhancing molecules or alternative delivery strategies.Immunostimulatory compounds can potentially improve responses when usedwith adjuvants and several have been investigated previously; seereviews (Guy, 2007; Mutwiri et al., 2011). Potential adjuvants includesaponins, bacterial components, compounds that interact with the innateimmune system such as Toll-like receptors, nucleic acids such as the CpGmotif, viruses, emulsions including liposomes, or a combination of anyof these components. Some of the more promising immunostimulatorymolecules that interact with the innate immune system are Tetanus toxoid(TT), heat-labile enterotoxin B subunit (LTB), and Cholera toxin Bsubunit CTB). Other compounds shown to enhance the immune systemempirically through innate chemical properties include saponin andmonophosphoryl lipid A (MPLA). Using mannose or other sugars to targetbinding to macrophage receptors may enhance immune function.Combinations of different adjuvants may act synergistically such as withIL-12 or other cytokines to stimulate the immune response.

The first experiment to improve the adjuvant compared theformaldehyde-cross-linked chitosan adjuvant, which consists of anantigen of interest cross-linked with 0.5% chitosan, using formaldehydeto generate the data shown in FIGS. 1-3 above. This adjuvant system wasthen used as the control or baseline for selection of the bestcombinations of selected candidate immune enhancing molecules. The testimmunogen was a Salmonella enteritidis (SE) bacterin grown to 10⁸ cfu/mland inactivated with formaldehyde. To determine whether the cross-linkedchitosan adjuvant could be further improved, the test immunogen(Salmonella bacterin with chitosan was 4×10⁷ cfu/ml with a final dose of1×10⁷ cfu per bird) was mixed in a 2:1 ratio with cross-linked chitosanalone or enhanced with tetanus toxoid (TT), heat-labile enterotoxin Bsubunit (LTB), or mannosylated chitosan and administered in either thedrinking water or feed. The results are presented in FIG. 4.

TT may be a potential immune enhancing molecule and has been usedextensively in vaccine development. The heat-labile enterotoxin from E.coli has been shown to be a powerful immunostimmulatory molecule but isvery toxic and is, therefore, not suitable as an adjuvant. Theheat-labile enterotoxin consists of two subunits, a central core LTA andfive subunits of LTB (da Hora et al., 2011). The LTB subunit retains theimmune adjuvant properties and yet is non-toxic. Therefore, this is asafe potential adjuvant component. Mannose and some other carbohydrates(such as galactose and fucose) are ligands for receptors that activatemacrophages. The mannosylated chitosan was prepared by a method similarto that described previously by Yalpani and Hall (1980 and 1985) andJayasree et. al., (2011) without the addition of the zinc. Briefly, twomolar equivalents of mannose in one volume of 0.1 M sodium acetate wereheated at 60° C. for two hours. The solution was then added to twovolumes of one molar equivalent of 2% chitosan in 0.15% acetic acid andallowed to react for 10 min at room temperature to produce 1.5%mannosylated chitosan. The SE bacterin was then added to 1.5%mannosylated chitosan in a two to one ratio. The Schiff bases formedwere then reduced with sodium cyanoborohydrate (NaCNBH₄).

In addition, to the immunopotentiating molecules, different deliverysystems were also investigated as noted above. The typical drinkingwater delivery system used in the poultry industry dilutes the drug orchemical one part to 128 parts of water. The original chitosan formulaused in FIGS. 1-3 was diluted 1:128 in the drinking water as a potentialdelivery system. The last test group was 0.5% chitosan cross-linked withformaldehyde with the SE bacteria (original chitosan formula)encapsulated by drop wise addition to tripolyphosphate (TPP) then driedand ground to a powder for addition to the feed at a rate of 0.5%(wt/wt).

Day-of-hatch broiler chicks were primed with 0.25 ml of the indicatedpreparations subcutaneously as outlined above. These groups were primedthe same as the chitosan only group. Chicks were boosted by oral garageat 12 days of age except for the drinking water and TPP groups whichwere boosted in water at 1:128 or in the feed at 0.5% (wt/wt) for 8hours, respectively. Antibody levels on day 22 in serum (IgG) and ilealmucosal (IgA) were determined with a competitive ELISA kit (IDEXX).Decreased absorbance levels or sample to control ratios indicate higherlevels of antibodies that recognize the SE flagellin coated plates.

As noted in FIGS. 1 and 2 above the chitosan adjuvant was superior toalum in producing a robust immune response. Here each of the chitosanbased adjuvants was able to produce a robust response to the SEbacterin, with significantly higher levels of both IgG and IgA ascompared to chitosan alone administered subcutaneously (FIGS. 4 and 5,respectively). The TT and dry powder TPP groups had a significantlyhigher immune response than the sq primed with sq boost chitosanadjuvant (FIGS. 4 and 5). The other three groups, chitosan with LTB,mannosylated chitosan, and chitosan boost in the drinking water, wereconsistently superior in antibody production as compared to chitosanalone administered subcutaneously (FIGS. 4 and 5).

In the next set of experiments, the three best groups from the previousexperiment (LTB, chitosan boost in DW, and reduced mannosylatedchitosan) were repeated along with the negative control (saline) and thebenchmark control of 0.5% formaldehyde-cross-linked-chitosanadministered sq for primary and boost vaccinations, which was previouslyshown to be superior to alum. In this experiment, we added three newtreatment groups using the benchmark control of 0.5%formaldehyde-cross-linked-chitosan immunopotentiated with either Choleratoxin B subunit (CTB), Lipid A from Salmonella (MPLA), or saponin. Alsoadded in this experiment was another treatment group that was thesimilar to the mannosylated chitosan treatment group, which was shown tobe an excellent adjuvant in the previous experiment (Mannosylatedchitosan version 1, Man-C V1), but this group was not reduced withNaCNBH₄ (Man-C V2).

The SE flagellin competitive ELISA again showed that the birdsvaccinated subcutaneously with 0.5% chitosan (C) for both the primaryand boost had higher levels of immunoglobulins in the serum (FIG. 6A).The birds vaccinated with 0.5% chitosan with CTB C+CTB), Man-C V2 andChitosan with saponin (C+saponin) gave the best IgG response (FIG. 6A).The Man-C V2 gave numerically the best IgA response (FIG. 6B). All threeof these treatment groups were significantly different from thebenchmark group (0.5% chitosan vaccinated sq for both the primary andboost) (FIG. 6).

In addition, the birds were challenged at day 19 with live Salmonella at5×10⁷ cfu/chick. Three days post-challenge the birds were cultured forSalmonella in the cecal tonsil (CT) and liver/spleen (L/S). Chitosanwith CTB, both versions of mannosylated chitosan, chitosan in thedrinking water boost, and chitosan plus saponin significantly decreasedSalmonella to below detectable limits in the liver/spleen (L/S) whencompared to the negative (saline vaccinated) control (FIG. 7; p<0.05).In the intestine (CT), the levels of Salmonella were significantlyreduced using either of the two versions of mannosylated chitosan and inthe group boosted with 0.5% chitosan diluted 1:128 in the drinkingwater. The significant decrease in the mannosylated chitosan groupsindicate that the direct targeting of the macrophage with a ligand forthe mannose receptor increases the effectiveness of the chitosanadjuvant. Also, very important is that the non-reduced Schiff-baseformulation of the mannosylated chitosan was just as effective as theNaCNBH₄ reduced mannosylated chitosan which did not have the addition ofa potentially harmful chemical. Another major surprise was that the1:128 diluted 0.5% chitosan in the drinking water that was used for theboost gave superior results in decreasing colonization of Salmonellacompared to parenteral vaccination only (FIG. 7).

Example V Route of Administration for Vaccination

The best route and adjuvant combination for vaccination wasinvestigated. Day-of-hatch chicks were administered 0.25 mL of eithersaline or the vaccine with the respective adjuvant mixture as indicatedin FIG. 8. The adjuvants compared include the formaldehyde-cross-linkedchitosan, the reduced mannosylated chitosan (Man C V1), the non-reducedmannosylated chitosan (Man C V2), and each adjuvant was combined withantigen and administered at day-of-hatch either subcutaneously or in thedrinking water. Birds were boosted with a second administration of thesame adjuvant-antigen combination either subcutaneously, in the drinkingwater or via oral gavage. The groups that were vaccinated in thedrinking water (DW) were diluted 1:128 in the water. Those boosted byoral gavage were given 0.25 ml. Mucosal IgA response was measured usinga competitive SE flagellin ELISA assay (IDEXX) as described above.Although the last live treatment groups in FIG. 8 were not significantlydifferent, the numerically lowest group was the mannosylated chitosan V2delivered sq in the primary vaccination and a 1:128 dilution in DW forthe boost. This group had significantly higher levels of IgA in theileum compared to 0.5% chitosan with sq primary vaccination and eithersq or DW boost. No significant differences were observed between thereduced and non-reduced forms of the mannosylated chitosan or when theboost was given via the drinking water or oral gavage.

Example VI Comparison to a Mineral Oil Based Adjuvant

The mannosylated chitosan was then compared to and combined with acommercially available mineral oil based adjuvant. Salmonellaenteritidis (SE) bacterin grown to 10⁸ cfu/ml and inactivated withformaldehyde was used as the antigen. The Salmonella bacterin was mixedwith chitosan, mannosylated chitosan, the mineral oil adjuvant, acombination of chitosan and the mineral oil adjuvant or PBS at 4×10⁷cfu/ml with a final dose of 1×10⁷ cfu per bird in a 2:1 ratio.Day-of-hatch broiler chicks were primed with 0.25 ml of the indicatedpreparations subcutaneously as outlined above. Chicks were boosted byoral gavage at 12 days of age. Antibody levels on day 22 in serum (IgG),and ileal mucosal (IgA) were determined with competitive ELISA kit(IDEXX) and results are shown in FIGS. 9 and 10, respectively. Decreasedabsorbance levels of sample to control ratios indicate higher levels ofantibodies that recognize the SE flagellin coated plates. Themannosylated chitosan vaccination and boost protocol producedsignificantly increased IgU and IgA levels as compared to each of theother groups.

Example VII IgG Response After a Single Administration

To investigate the IgG immune response after a single parenteralvaccination, day-of-hatch chicks were vaccinated subcutaneously with2.5×10⁸ cfu/poult Bordetella avium bacteria combined with saline, normalchitosan or mannosylated chitosan. Serum was collected at day 14 and theBordetella specific IgG was measured by ELISA. The results are shown inFIG. 11 and show the sample to positive control ratios of absorbance forthe indicated treatments. Higher levels of absorbance are indicative ofincreased specific IgG. The mannosylated chitosan combined with theBordetella antigen produced the highest levels of IgG.

Example VIII IgG Response After Boost in the Drinking Water

To investigate the IgG immune response after administration ofBordetella avium bacterin subcutaneously followed by a drinking waterboost at day 14. Day-of-hatch chicks were vaccinated subcutaneously with2.5×10⁸ cfu/poult Bordetella bacterin combined with saline, normalchitosan or mannosylated chitosan. At day 14, 7.8×106 cfu/mL Bordetellaavium bacterin was included in the drinking water as a boost tovaccination. At day 21, 7 days post-boost serum was collected and thespecific IgG response was measured by ELISA. The results are shown inFIG. 12 and show the sample to positive control ratios of absorbance forthe indicated treatments. Higher levels of absorbance are indicative ofincreased specific IgG. The mannosylated chitosan combined with theBordetella antigen produced significantly higher levels of IgG ascompared to the control or unmodified chitosan.

Methods for Adjuvant Preparation:

Preparation of Chitosan-Protein Cross-Linked with Formaldehyde Vaccine:

The final product of chitosan without mannose can range from a minimumfinal concentration of 0.5% chitosan and maximal final concentration of2% chitosan in the vaccine formulation. Chitosan is dissolved in asolution containing 15 ml of glacial acetic acid per L deionized waterat the appropriate concentration (1.5% acetic acid in water). Typicallyfor broth cultures 2 volumes of culture are mixed with one volume of1.5% chitosan (0.5% chitosan in the final vaccine formulation). Otherantigens are diluted as minimal as possible giving a final concentrationof up to 1.5% chitosan. The formaldehyde is then added to theantigen-dissolved chitosan mixture such that the final concentration is0.2% formaldehyde or 0.008 M formaldehyde. In the Examples above, a 37%solution of formaldehyde is used. Tris-HCl can be added to a finalconcentration 0.5 g/L.

Preparation of Mannosylated Chitosan:

Two molar equivalents of mannose in one volume of 0.1 M sodium acetate,pH 4.0 were heated at 60° C. for two hours. The solution was then addedto two volumes of one molar equivalent of 2% chitosan in 0.15% aceticacid and allowed to react for 10 min at room temperature to produce a1.5% mannosylated chitosan solution. This can then be mixed with brothcultures such that 2 volumes of culture are mixed with one volume of1.5% mannosylated chitosan. Concentrated antigens can be diluted asminimal as possible or as desired. Tris-HCl can be added to a finalconcentration 0.5 g/L.

1. A composition comprising an antigen and a carbohydrate linked tochitosan to form a Schiff base, wherein the carbohydrate is mannose andthe antigen comprises a microbe.
 2. (canceled)
 3. (canceled)
 4. Thecomposition of claim 1, wherein the Schiff base is not reduced.
 5. Thecomposition of claim 1, wherein the Schiff base is reduced.
 6. Acomposition comprising between 0.5% and 2% of an aldehyde cross-linkedchitosan, an antigen and Tris-HCl to quench free aldehydes.
 7. Thecomposition of claim 6, wherein the chitosan is cross-linked withformaldehyde.
 8. (canceled)
 9. The composition of claim 1, furthercomprising an enhancing molecule, wherein the enhancing molecule isselected from the group consisting of saponin, toll-like receptors, theB subunit of a bacterial toxin, bacterial toxins, CpG motifs, liposomes,monophosphoryl lipid A, tetanus toxoid, cholera toxin B subunit, heatlabile enterotoxin B subunit, and tripolyphosphate.
 10. (canceled) 11.(canceled)
 12. A vaccine formulation comprising the composition ofclaims 1 and a protein antigen.
 13. (canceled)
 14. The vaccine of claim1, wherein the protein is Influenza M2e, Hemaglutinin, Neuraminidase, ornuclear proteins; Eimeria TRAP or MPP; Clostridium sialidase, SagA,alpha-toxin, NetB toxin, or iron transport protein.
 15. (canceled) 16.The vaccine of claim 12, wherein the microbe is Salmonella, Escherichia,Shigella, Bordetella, Clostridium, Mycoplasma, Staphylococcus,Streptococcus, Bacillus, Influenza, or Eimeria.
 17. The vaccine of claim12, wherein the microbe is inactivated or killed.
 18. The vaccine ofclaim 17, wherein the microbe is killed using formaldehyde,glutaraldehyde or formalin.
 19. A method of making the composition ofclaims 6, comprising dissolving chitosan in a solution of acetic acid,adding an antigen to the dissolved chitosan, combining the dissolvedchitosan and antigen with an aldehyde such that the final concentrationof the aldehyde is between 0.02% and 0.5% and adding Tris-HCl to quenchfree aldehydes.
 20. The method of claim 19, wherein the antigen is aprotein or a microbial vaccine.
 21. (canceled)
 22. (canceled)
 23. Themethod of claim 19, wherein the aldehyde is added at a finalconcentration of 0.2%.
 24. A method of enhancing the immune response ofa subject to an antigen comprising administering the composition ofclaim 1 to the subject.
 25. The method of claim 24, wherein the immuneresponse includes an enhanced antibody response as compared toadministering a vaccine without an adjuvant.
 26. The method of claim 25,wherein the enhanced antibody response is an enhanced secretory IgAantibody response as compared to administering a vaccine without anadjuvant.
 27. (canceled)
 28. The method of claim 24, wherein the subjectis a mammal or poultry.
 29. The method of claim 24, wherein the route ofadministration is subcutaneous or oral.
 30. The method of claim 24,wherein the vaccine formulation is administered in food or drinkingwater.
 31. A method of enhancing the immune response of a subject to anantigen comprising administering a vaccine formulation comprising theantigen and an adjuvant composition comprising between 0.5% and 2% of analdehyde cross-linked chitosan in which the free aldehydes are quenchedwith Tris-HCl to the subject in an amount effective to enhance theimmune response to the antigen, wherein the antigen is a microbe.